|
|||||
![]() | |||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Home | |
Summary of Case Studies and Key Lessons4. The main lessons derived from case studies were summarized and commented on by central government officials, NGOs and training institutions. These discussions were followed by a presentation about knowledge management required when new and best practices are to be applied. The Forum concluded by establishing an “Asian Regional Knowledge Management Network”. 5. Over 30 case studies were submitted and some 20 discussed in the plenary session or during group sessions. Case studies were drawn from Bangladesh, Cambodia, PRC, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Viet Nam. All studies can be accessed at Asian Mayors’ Forum homepage on ADBI website a t www.adbi.org/ asiancities/ and also on ESCAP’s website under www.unescap.org 6. The case studies (i) first addressed the issue of how to improve living conditions in cities in particular of the poor and (ii) then discussed how to improve opportunities and access to municipal services for the poor in cities. The case studies on improving living conditions in the city for the poor focused on improving housing quality, reducing environmental degradation, reducing illness and improving health and improving mobility and affordable transport. Case studies on providing opportunities and access for the poor in the city focused on access to employment, income generating opportunities, access to urban services and community amenities, access to credit and providing skills training. 7. From the case studies a number of lessons and issues were identified that are common to many Asian cities: (1) The importance of cities in national growth is generally underestimated and inadequately accounted for in city planning (for example the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Seoul exceeds the entire GDP of Indonesia) (2) Cities occupy just 2 percent of the world’s land surface, but they use three quarters of the world’s resources and discharge a similar percentage of waste. A regional perspective in planning needs therefore to be taken (3) Knowledge of urbanization processes and urban development remains scattered and fragmented (4) Investments in infrastructure and industries need to take into account local implications and require coordination and linkage planning (5) Policies to stimulate and regulate growth are ad hoc and ineffective in particular with regard to urban areas (6) Urbanization and city development remains a low government priority (7) Available information and the skill level required for urban development activities remain low. This also applies to coordination of activities among organizations involved (8) Financial resources required to maintain and develop urban infrastructure and services remain insufficient. Morever, such financial resources are used unimaginatively (9) The legal framework and institutional structure is generally inadequate, management systems are outdated and organizations ill equipped (10) Most cities do not sufficiently address the poverty problem. The vibrant informal sector remains misunderstood and is often even neglected (11) Existing rules and regulations are frequently unimaginative, restrictive, lead to unauthorized construction and breed corruption (12) Efforts to involve and educate people and to raise their civic and environmental consciousness need to be enhanced. This should lead to stronger participation of the major stakeholders (13) Positive as well as negative impacts of globalization on urban development are still not well understood (14) With increasing natural disasters, most cities are ill prepared for disaster management (15) Environmental pollution and degradation continues to worsen in most cities. Technologies to reverse this trend exist but are not applied (16) The social aspects of urban living, stress, tension gender discrimination, marginalization, crime are not addressed adequately (17) Ecological and social sustainability in Asian cities are endangered
8. From the lessons learned and issues outlined, it emerged that good governance is central for urban development and poverty reduction. Good governance in this context includes (i) a progressive perspective which is a function of good leadership which local authorities must provide, (ii) functional partnerships which are vehicles that enable cities to tap community resources and (iii) participation to ensure long-term sustainability by generating broad-based stakeholder and community ownership over local undertakings. 9. Another requirement considered necessary for good urban development in support of poverty reduction and social development was the solid and wellfunded autonomy of local authorities. 10. Case studies also revealed the importance of accountability of governments and politicians for their actions. Accountability therefore requires governments to engage with its constituents—especially with those who are marginalized and poor. It was noted that the process of engaging communities in the formulation and implementation of public policy and development programs has evolved significantly over the several decades. There has been a four-step evolution of processes to involve communities and other stakeholders:
11. It was noted that most societies have reached step (2) of the above process. Some of the case studies showed that certain cities are already involved in step (3) and reported positive experiences with engaging communities. [previous chapter]
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||
| Contact Us FAQs Sitemap Help | Terms of Use Privacy Policy | ||
| © 2012 Asian Development Bank Institute. | ||